EPTThey're all 4 pretty bad.
Season 3 Ladder Pool Updates - Page 28
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Noocta
France12578 Posts
They're all 4 pretty bad. | ||
|
Misanthrope
United States924 Posts
| ||
|
zawk9
United States427 Posts
On June 21 2011 06:50 typedef struct wrote: TL doesn't like them because they make the game more difficult and less like BW. Huh? If anything they make the game far less difficult since you never have to learn how to macro off of more than two bases. | ||
|
Pipeline
Sweden1673 Posts
On June 21 2011 05:07 Laurence wrote: Way more impactful than the actual maps is whether they will have close positions or not. Will they? Judging from the current state of Metalopolis that is in the ladder pool. Id say that close positions will most likely be possible | ||
|
CEPEHDREI
Germany1521 Posts
| ||
|
DensitY
New Zealand74 Posts
On June 21 2011 06:47 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: Well in that sense you could say that the rocks add more strategy because it makes the price of taking that expansion larger, over spending that time and money into something else. True, you can consider it like, but I feel the price is large enough if one goes for a fast expansion because fast expansions often mean that all income is going towards economy. There'll be no standing ground army to defend a sudden attack. In my PvZ example, if a Zerg has to build a force to destroy rocks, he might as well go attack the Protoss since even if he destroys the rocks and expands he'll be behind, putting him into a position where he needs to deal damage to the protoss, who by then would have a force to defend. Now you could argue that they can expand somewhere else but again the risk is unfairly too high in my opinion. Rocks at expansions are pretty much only giving a player who scouts someone taking a FE at their natural in the ZvX matchup only one option to nip it in the butt. | ||
|
pestilenz
Denmark379 Posts
I think most of them look nice and I am exited to see new maps. Must agree that it at some point can look a bit difficult to take a third on the first and third map. On the others though, I think it seems fairly easy to take a third for all races. But haven't Blizzard not already said that they make map for all ways to play? Some maps intentionally favoring rushes and others macro - correct me if I am wrong. But still, exited for the new maps ^^ | ||
|
Corrosive
Canada3741 Posts
they are infinitely better designed, better looking, better everything. seriously. i don't see a reason why they are keeping these maps out of the game. every time new maps come out from blizzard everyone complains. and the maps deserve to be complained about. very bland maps, yet again. at least they're better than slag pits, as far as i can see. | ||
zhurai
United States5660 Posts
 | ||
|
MonsieurGrimm
Canada2441 Posts
On June 21 2011 06:56 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: Haha, yeah true. But making the gold there by the rocks, might be better than the rocks they put on a normal base on Tal'Darim. Hopefully! yeah, if the thirds are gold then it makes up for the loss of making those units. unfortunately, right now on maps like taldarim where the 3rd is blocked and blue, I go 2 base hydra allin against FFE. usually it works because most protosses don't know how to hold it, but it still doesn't feel good. On June 21 2011 06:56 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: Protoss can 6 gate against a fast third. Boohoo, you were too greedy. A Zerg can 6 pool a Protoss going Nexus first. Geez, that seems imbalanced. the difference is that you can't reactively 6pool, it's a blind coin toss, but you can (probably) scout a fast 3rd and 6gate. | ||
|
Megaliskuu
United States5123 Posts
| ||
|
Ballistixz
United States1269 Posts
| ||
|
Ribbon
United States5278 Posts
Kerrigan's Wrath looks very Spanishiwa-friendly. I'm thinking of placing spines near my ramp to defend my nat, and later moving them down to defend the shared choke to my nat and my third. | ||
|
Toadvine
Poland2234 Posts
On June 21 2011 06:47 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: That wasn't the point of my post, idk why you started with that. Who says that Zerg was designed that way? Zerg can put on their own kinds of pressure. Totally disagree there. You can't compare them just by their income and say, Terran works best in low econ situations. Also, that's only when you're talking about saturated bases and if the Terran doesn't use his energy for anything else. Now, is it true most of the time? Probably. But what if the natural is so friggin huge that it's pretty much open from all angles except 5 degrees which is the ramp? That would be hard as hell for Terran to defend, while it wouldn't be a problem for Zerg. So in that situation, Zerg could easily get 2 base vs 1. David Kim said Zerg was designed that way, at Blizzcon 2010, Multiplayer Panel if I remember correctly. Early Zerg units aren't supposed to be good at attacking up ramps. Surely, if you look at the Roach and Zergling, you'll see that there is some merit to this statement. Actually, Terrans have a higher mineral income from the moment their OC finishes, assuming they MULE consistently. Look at Lalush's macro analysis thread, it's all there. Incidentally, Terrans suffer the least from pulling their workers to attack too, so I would indeed argue that they work best in low-econ situations. Finally, Zerg doesn't like completely open naturals at all. Their defense against very early aggression (before ling speed) depends on spine crawlers, which are terrible in open spaces. This is why things like 2 rax or hellions are really good on Xel'Naga Caverns, and a lot worse on Shakuras. | ||
|
Mortal
2943 Posts
| ||
|
1st_Panzer_Div.
United States621 Posts
As long as these maps are replacing backwater gultch and the likes, not much to complain about. (If they are removing tal'adrium and meta or something, I just might cry) | ||
|
Nerski
United States1095 Posts
On June 21 2011 01:21 Two_DoWn wrote: Looks like blizzard still doenst get it. That's my impression as well, all their reasonings for the way they make maps would make sense if they made all the races to work in every possible positioning equally but they don't. | ||
|
Wren
United States745 Posts
On June 21 2011 06:56 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: A Zerg can 6 pool a Protoss going Nexus first. Geez, that seems imbalanced. Your analysis in reply to my first bit was exactly right, you can't take that third quickly. Rocks are a very temporary barricade, and provide a much larger boon to defense when used with units with useful range, rather than against them, making them minimally useful on defense for Zergs. As for this little tidbit, it's just wrong. Zerg must go 6 pool before doing anything else, including scouting position, nevermind first building choice. We saw today exactly what order of events that 6 pool brings, and how the greediest of Protoss builds can still allow a wall to be up in time. Also, PvZ sees 6gate, but never ever nexus first. | ||
|
Daralii
United States16991 Posts
On June 21 2011 06:57 Misanthrope wrote: Blizzard needs to stop accommodating people that like 'rush games'. I've never met any of these fabled folk. Seriously just institute GSL maps only, they should know by now they're bad at map design. Well there's BitByBit, and... I can't think of anyone else tbh. | ||
|
FrostedMiniWheats
United States30730 Posts
| ||
| ||
